The way student achievement is measured tops the list of changes that some local educators would like to see to the federal No Child Left Behind program.

Even if schools are making improvements in their scoring on tests, it may not be enough to keep up with the arbitrary standards of the federal laws.

The rigid standards are possibly setting up some schools and educators so they can’t succeed, local educators said.

“I agree with the fact students should be 100percent proficient – it’s a noble idea – but we also knew, with a target like that, nearly all or some schools would fail,” said Frank Wells, spokesman for the California Teachers Association.

“We need to set the bar high and and keep moving forward, but not (setting) schools up for being failures.”

The goal of the No Child Left Behind Act of 2001 was to have 100percent of public school students “proficient” by the year 2014. Proficiency is measured via annual state-level tests in reading and math in third through eighth grades as well as at least once in high school.

Educators are not alone in seeking a change to the proficiency measurement.

A Rand Corp. report in late April recommends a number of major revisions to the act to promote more rigorous academic standards across states as well as consistent teacher qualification requirements.

The report finds that the flexibility provided for in the Elementary and Secondary Act – which originated in 1965 and was reauthorized as No Child Left Behind in 2001 – has expanded the patchwork of accountability systems across the states.

The result is dozens of separate systems, each with different academic standards, levels of student proficiency and requirements for teacher certification, the report says.

The Rand recommendations follow several years of study and evaluation for the U.S. Department of Education. The research institution examined the impacts of NCLB on teachers, schools, school districts and at the state level.

“While No Child Left Behind aims to improve schools, Congress can improve the law,” said Brian Stecher, the report’s co-author and associate director of Rand Education.

“Schools and school districts certainly engaged in a flurry of improvement activities, including implementing the lesser corrective actions mandated by the law. But states typically have not implemented the most severe restructuring interventions for the chronically lowest-performing schools.”

While the NCLB legislation generally has helped schools focus on improvement and helped states put into place accountability systems, researchers said, the goal of 100percent proficiency among students in reading and mathematics by 2014 is unattainable.

The Rand report says that goal may discourage principals and teachers in their improvement efforts. It recommends the reauthorized law set a more appropriate improvement target.

Rand researchers recommend that an alternative accountability system be explored that incorporates growth without the current targeting structure.

“On the top of my list to be changed is this whole accountability model,” said Jeff Ellingsen, director of assessment/research for the Chaffey Joint Union High School District, which mostly covers Ontario, Montclair and Rancho Cucamonga.

“There has to be some commonality across the states about common accountability.”

Consistency among states is important, said Gary Rapin, superintendent of the Bonita Unified School District, which includes La Verne and San Dimas.

“Every state has a different way of measuring accountability. What we want to be about as educators is that each student is making the progress and that they are doing that from kindergarten and throughout the system,” Rapin said.

“Now, we’re looking at just grade level to the next grade, and that’s like looking at it as apples and oranges.”

In March, Secretary of Education Arne Duncan laid down a blueprint for federal law that would move away from punishing schools that don’t meet benchmarks and focus on rewarding schools for progress, particularly with poor and minority students.

All students graduating from high school would need to be ready for college or a career by 2020, according to the blueprint. That’s a shift away from the current law, which calls for all students to be performing at grade level in reading and math by 2014.

Ellingsen said that while the blueprint is a great goal, how it will be attainable is unknown.

Rand researchers say that the states’ reliance on traditional student testing has caused a narrowing of school curricula, encouraged teachers to focus on some students at the expense of others and discouraged the development of higher-thinking and problem-solving skills.

The report also recommends expanding the focus from two academic areas – reading and mathematics – to other area such as science, social studies and the arts. It also recommends broadening test measurements and holding schools accountable for results in areas beyond reading and math.

“Currently, there is an overemphasis of knowledge,” said John Glenn, president of the Upland Teachers Association. “What we need is a combination of not just teaching students the concepts of the types of fields, but also teaching them the knowledge aspect of it.”

The Rand report does not address whether NCLB as a whole, or even specific provisions, was effective in increasing student achievement in reading and mathematics.